Just had to out this somewhere and this is probably the most safe space for it.
I am an ultra left anarchist so i support any progress shift in us political polls and i do get it.
I dont and wont ask people to stop using effective political memes. But whenever i see a top comment labeled these bad people as weird, i feel like i too would not be accepted, even if i know thats not what its about.
Sorry.
There’s good weird and bad weird.
You know which one you are.
And I’m gonna say good weird.
If you identify as weird, that’s good weird.
Unfortunately, the sociopaths who are being called weird are butthurt about it, and the people who might vote for them are dissuaded when they hear these people are weird. It’s bizarre that pointing out they’re criminals, christofascists, and rapists doesn’t affect them as much.
I have identified as weird since fifth grade, and it would be nice if something other than name calling—especially this one—was working. But if this takes power from the most vile, I feel like I should let it slide.
It’s bizarre that…
It’s perfectly in line with their beliefs to be unconcerned with those things. Conformity is their number one concern, so you can see how being called weird is a bigger deal.
Yeah, I guess what I really mean is I don’t understand how people can be like that.
A comment I saw recently said if someone is called weird and they agree with you, they are the good weird, but if you call them weird and they get defensive/aggressive they are the bad weird. You are clearly the good kind of weird, and I think everyone else will recognize that if you call yourself weird.
I’ve had this handle since '94, and I am not letting any of this bother me.
Others have said it better than I can, but how you see yourself as weird, and why it bothers the politicians it does, are not the same thing.
They live in a different world where conformity is king and being different is scorned.
Don’t let it ruffle you, none of this has anything at all to do with you, how you live your life, or how you perceive yourself.
You know, you’re right. I’m weird. I love being weird. I associate with weird people, generally those who would also self-identify as weird.
It’s a fluid word that can be used in a lot of weird ways.
But it has never bothered me that it’s used in this context personally. I understand it’s directed at people who are just not right, and in other times that could’ve included some of us.
It’s of course meant in the context of “You are acting unacceptably and we can’t be quiet about it anymore.”
And the meme came from Gov. Walz, who carves butter. That’s weird! In a strange and adorable Midwestern way.
There’s good weird and bad weird. They’re bad weird. Which are you?
They’re good weird because they openly embrace being weird. It’s the denial that gets weird weird.
I’m my weird.
Hell yeah
I just feel it’s weird how many people suddenly have an issue with the word “weird” now that someone used it against a Republican once. Oh, the humanity, for such a word to be (very accurately) applied, oh, the horror.
Could be people who got mocked for being weird growing up, owning the term and letting go of their masking of (quite common) neurodiversity and now feeling threatened by people who start to equal weird with hateful or bigoted.
In a world where weird equals horrible, how does that colour those that call themselves weird?
Yeah, and none of that is new in any kind of sense, but suddenly now it’s an issue with this specific word.
I feel like “weird” misses the mark. It’s quite hurtful to people who are outside the norm and proud of it.
“Creepy” is a way better description of those guys.
It is amazing that weird works better than something more accurate like creepy.
Honestly? Some of those SoBs are ontologically evil but you call them that and they’ll laugh.
One of very few bits of rhetoric that actually phases them is the claim that everyone isn’t, at least secretly, just as evil as they are. That there’s something abnormal about how hateful they are, or in other words that they are weird in being so detestable.
Creepy is almost too specific. Too harsh. It’s too “out of line”. People are surprisingly sensitive to that kind of thing.
But “weird”… Weird is fuzzy enough to get away with. It’s non-specific. It’s the sideways head-nod or glance to “creepy’s” direct finger point. People know you mean they give you the “ick” when you say it, because it comes with the body language that communicates that, vs that which communicates “quirky”.
“Weird and unsettling” is an accurate phrase to describe these people, and I don’t see much overlap with how people talk about me at all. And they’ve been calling me weird for 35 years or more now.
The trouble with “creepy” is that it’s emotive. Although it’s absolutely a correct word to use, it can easily be dismissed as an insult.
“Weird” is less of an insult, and can be taken objectively. I’ve got OCD, I know I’m weird - I’d be lying if I pretended otherwise.
But the thing is, Trump and Co don’t just want to be seen as “normal”, they want to be seen as the best at “normal”.
This is why “weird” works. It’s possible to argue that Trump being creepy is just someone else’s opinion, but it’s very hard to deny that he doesn’t do and say some weird things.
This is sticking because, even with the ludicrous amounts of good-faith his supporters have for him, it’s undeniably true, and possibly taps into any underlying misgivings they may have.
I assumed “weird” was used intentionally as an understatement for comedic effect.
You’re weird in a different way. Unless you also normalize bigotry and hate… Which is weirder.
I just want to say that I really appreciate your post. I’ve wondered about this and the comments have been enlightening.
Just another bump for good weird.
My most prominent vest patch just says ‘stay weird’. Because good weird is good!
I was literally just thinking about this, like a few minutes before seeing this post. It sounds like for some reason this political usage of “weird” is working, and annoying me is a small price to pay to stop Trump. But it does bug me, mostly because anything the left starts using, the right will eventually appropriate, and then it will spread and get widespread use outside of politics. I can see it becoming like “snowflake”, which used to mean “special and unique”, and then started being used in political discourse to mean “oversensitive”, and is now being used everywhere. I wouldn’t be surprised if this trend means that a couple of years from now, “weird” is a very popular go-to insult even outside of politics, which will habituate people to associating weirdness with negativity (not that people need any incentive to do that).
Obviously it’s a better outcome than a lot of other things that can result from politics, but it’s irksome now and I can imagine the world being mildly more uncomfortable for everyone who doesn’t conform to mainstream social standards in a couple of years than it is now.
Tl;Dr - sounds like you’re thinking exactly what I was thinking, down to the mild-to-moderate level of discomfort and the acknowledgement that it might be necessary
Thank you for putting this into words. I got called weird all the time as a kid, made the choice to take it as a compliment. It getting used right now the way it is to offend bad people doesn’t bother me, but I am worried about the knock on effects of weird being more heavily perceived as negative over time.
In my opinion, “internal weird” is different from “external weird”.
MAGA people don’t think differently, they aren’t anti-conformity, they’re just… weird.
They want to tell you who you are and how you’re allowed to live your life, they hang out with pedophiles, they concern themselves only with themselves 100% of the time, they are obsessed with genitals, they take pride in annoying others, they make politicians their whole identity, they are always angry, etc… It’s more creepy than weird. But “weird” is just a shorthand.
I like to think that being called weird isn’t an insult. But it is being taken as an insult when used on people who call others weird as an insult themselves.
We’re in good company identifying as something that’s been used as a slur, like “gay” and “queer” have. We can still own it.
Anyone accepting of diversity won’t hold it against anyone who has considered themselves (good) weird.
Those who “weird” is being used against probably would have used the word in a derogatory way against us anyway. I don’t think the current meme will make bigots any worse.
Honestly, I find it amusing. They take weird as an insult because they’d use it as one meanwhile there’s a notable number of people who self-identify as weird.
I suppose logically I would though I don’t usually use the exact term. More often I’ll state ‘Normalcy is overrated.’ Whomever I’m talking to can think whichever term about me. If they vocalize it and it’s distasteful to me I might redirect to ‘weird’ but I generally don’t feel the need to give them a term… which I guess is weird in it’s own right considering most people would give their preferred term xD
Weird in modern parlance by the laity is an expression of uncanny oddness, as per The Weird Sisters ( or Wyrd Sisters ) in the play MacBeth. It’s a common reaction to esoterica which is information or knowledge that sounds odd and dangerous without understanding of context. There’s intersection with secret as in secret societies like the Freemasons which are actually esoteric societies in that they dabble in esoterica (in the case of Masons, pro-tips on how to build structures so they stay up for a long while).
In context of the current election seasoin Kat Abu explains it really well ( on YouTube ), weird is not the point, and some adjectives may serve better. The point is some of the policies and statements of Trump, of Vance, of Project 2025 (and the other usual suspects, e.g. The Republican Party, The Heritage Foundation, The Federalist Society, etc.) seem odd to those of us who want to live in a functional democratic society and want a public serving government, and those policies / statements require more context than we’re being given.
- Why does Trump need dictatorial powers on day one?
- Why does Trump say Christians won’t have to vote again (or accuse them of not voting much when they do)?
- Why does Vance have contempt for childless women who like cats?
- Why do they (Trump / Vance / P2025) keep talking about immigration invasions and crime waves even when crime is low compared to our history, and migrant populations have significantly lower crime rates than the general population? Also it’s generally a right and proper thing to provide sanctuary to refugees from abroad?
- Why do GOP officials begrudge children school lunches, or library access (even to adult matters, if they’re interested)
- Why do they want to defund Social Security
- Why do they encourage police brutality on protestors?
- Why do they freak out over trans folk?
The list goes on and on, and normal Americans appear to believe it’s right and proper to feed our kids, to have social safety nets, to have free and open abortion access, for education to be affordable, for workers to be able to balance work with parenting, recreation, civics and getting the laundry done. And yet, the Republican party (including Trump, Vance, etc.) seem to think the opposite is true.
In fact, a lot of them sound like an NSDAP party member trying to explain why mass executions are a pretty good idea.
So either they need to explain themselves, or we get to tag their positions as unsuitable for elected offices in the United States, especially the presidency. Weird is an easy word for it, but there are dozens of others, including just bollocks.
